Skip to content


  1. Daft Durden
    September 28, 2018 @ 4:12 am

    Minimum Wage laws are destructive on many levels and you point out a great example.

    Which is better for the employees:
    -Minimum wage set at $23/hr?
    -Minimum wage set at $7/hr?
    -Minimum wage set at $0/hr?

    Who would willing work for $0/hr if the purpose of the job or employment was to earn an income? Just because there is no set minimum wage doesn’t mean the talent pool wouldn’t self regulate and compete to prove a higher worth. To say an employer and employee couldn’t negotiate on their own to define a mutually beneficial compensation arrangement without government intervention is also beyond insulting.

    Rising costs of goods, higher unemployment, understaffed work environments are all unintended consequences of this seemingly noble law.

    This also leads to another touchy subject of modern times, the antimeritocracy movement.


  2. logitarian
    September 28, 2018 @ 4:26 am

    Proponents of this seemingly noble law also face a moral dilemma: they support violent interference of this transaction between employer and employee, yet offer no alternative. They’re essentially saying, “I will not allow Jane to pay Bob what she wants to pay him and what he wants to receive…yet I will offer absolutely no alternative option to Bob.”

    Depriving someone of their best option (which is clearly the case since they’re willing to take the job), while you offer them exactly zero dollars, is patently immoral and benefits no one.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.